Politics Thread!

[gravy]

These sites are utter toilet but!

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/05 ... firmation/

And then!

http://order-order.com/2015/05/12/carsw ... cus-moment

Fight on for the UKRAP KROWN

[pogo]

Where Federalism exists there is significant internal migration based on practical decisions (education, etc.) so actually I think the Scots should have a say in the English system if for no other reason than to ensure the system in England is not perceived (rightly or wrongly) as poorer than the Scottish one and so encourage cross border migration.

I don’t see how that follows. Or if it does then English MPs should have as much say over the Scottish system, which would require a large undoing and rollback of devolution. Besides, according to the SNP they want more powers so they can have different laws to the UK to boost Scotland’s economy, to deal with any gap in wealth. It’s unclear they will be able to do so but that does not mean we should stop them trying.

I am a strong believer in subsidiarity, which just means doing things at the lowest political level that makes sense. We are pretty poor at doing this in the UK, with successive governments concerned most with taking on more powers and centralising, not devolving powers and allowing local authorities, education authorities, heath authorities more autonomy.

The argument for greater subsidiarity is it produces more local experiments, trying out different laws and practices, different strategies to solve problems. Migration is not a problem as when it is clear what works best other localities tend to adopt it, spreading best practices and good ideas. And allow enough autonomy in enough areas and no one locality comes out ahead in all of them.

The classic example of this is Europe. Go back around 500 years and China was the richest and most developed country in the world. But after centuries lagging behind Europe lept forward, and with leaps and bounds came to conquer the world. One main driver of this was competition between states, in navigation, in warfare, in science, in technology, in industry. If one country fell behind another could take its place – Portugal and Spain first carved up the world between them but were overtaken by France and England.

[starshipcommand]

Now, I said, as this campaign went on, that if I didn't win, I would stand down as leader of UKIP.
And I know that you in the media are used to party leaders making endless promises that they don't actually keep, but I'm a man of my word.

Farage's resignation speech, from last Friday. He really is hilarious, what a tit

[VNVObit]

I don’t see how that follows. Or if it does then English MPs should have as much say over the Scottish system, which would require a large undoing and rollback of devolution. Besides, according to the SNP they want more powers so they can have different laws to the UK to boost Scotland’s economy, to deal with any gap in wealth. It’s unclear they will be able to do so but that does not mean we should stop them trying.

England could swamp Scotland's infrastructure far faster than Scotland could swamp England's.

I am a strong believer in subsidiarity, which just means doing things at the lowest political level that makes sense. We are pretty poor at doing this in the UK, with successive governments concerned most with taking on more powers and centralising, not devolving powers and allowing local authorities, education authorities, heath authorities more autonomy.

That's a good argument for scrapping FPTP as the reason why the UK is so poor is there's no incentive to be inventive as politicians voted in by a minority of people will act in an ideological manner we no thought for the long term (neither main party is good at this). The tension (and drive) for devolution is result of the centre representing their own party's ideology and not the people they actually govern.

The argument for greater subsidiarity is it produces more local experiments, trying out different laws and practices, different strategies to solve problems. Migration is not a problem as when it is clear what works best other localities tend to adopt it, spreading best practices and good ideas. And allow enough autonomy in enough areas and no one locality comes out ahead in all of them.

The classic example of this is Europe. Go back around 500 years and China was the richest and most developed country in the world. But after centuries lagging behind Europe lept forward, and with leaps and bounds came to conquer the world. One main driver of this was competition between states, in navigation, in warfare, in science, in technology, in industry. If one country fell behind another could take its place – Portugal and Spain first carved up the world between them but were overtaken by France and England.

Migration isn't a large problem where there are language barriers (which your analogy relies upon) but where there are none then it can become problematic as does identity e.g. Northern Ireland which wanted to be Irish when mad cow hit Britain.
There are also practical issues around the border between Republic and Northern Ireland with the varying tax regimes (and commercial practices) driving consumers north/south as the exchange rate/tax rates change, which given the ideological split between Scotland and England (under FPTP not actual popular vote) are quite likely to be repeated

The argument against subsidiarity is one of interfaces and knowing where to draw the appropriate lines without losing sight of the overall picture. Track record in this country on that , even in the microcosm of PFI contracts, is incredibly poor. Should we experiment - yes but only on matters that aren't likely to damage people's health/prospects and where there is an actual consensus rather than an ideological push for a particular result.

[gravy]

Cameron today on bringing in his THOUGHT CRIME legislation:

For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens: as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone.

Great!

[gilesgoat]

Cameron today on bringing in his THOUGHT CRIME legislation:

For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens: as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone.

Great!

Now they won't leave you alone even if you obey the law

[KlaxonCow]

For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens: as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone.

Yes, within a month, we'll have been saying that for exactly 800 years, in fact.

Clause 39:
No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land.

So much for standing up for "British values", eh?

[gravy]

Yeah fuck habeas corpus;, it's hard to spell and sounds like a shit seventies prog song.

[gilesgoat]

Sounds a bit a case like "whoever is a radical will be hit by anti radicalism laws, however whoever wants to implement anti radicalism laws is a radical"

[gilesgoat]

Clause 39:
No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land.

The problem(s) of such things lies all in the definition and interpretation of things like "equals" "lawful judgment" "law" and "land".

You can play SO MUCH around all those you can make lawfully happen whatever you want.

"I say you are NOT my equal" .. "I say you are"

"I say this is NOT lawful" .. " I say it is" .. "you say but I don't accept it" .. etc.

All those lines can be blurred ...

[edit] .. hum .. should NOT say that but as you know "in the modern times" your "laws of the land" has ALSO to comply/confront/be compared/modified/etc. according to the "laws of other lands" ..

... unless of course you are truly a completely isolated island with no commerce or political ties whatsoever with any other country in the world and so full of resources ...

[VNVObit]

For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens: as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone.

Yes, within a month, we'll have been saying that for exactly 800 years, in fact.

Clause 39:
No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land.

So much for standing up for "British values", eh?

Feels a bit like " These are my values and if you don't like them I have others"

The lack of a written constitution that can only be altered by the nation (via a referendum) undermines the principles of Magna Carta , as opposed the the letter of it. As by the letter they're changing the law of the land to effectively comply with clause 39 (though obviously not in principle)

[offyoutoddle]

is it just me or is this string of oppressive policy announcements sucking all the joy out of living ? I confess I may have to take a blanket newsbreak soon so as to avoid a period of soul crushing despair overwhelming me. Not sure if i'm over reacting or witnessing the start of something truly awful here. i only know I am feeling progressively more depressed as each day passes.

[phattslagg]

Yup. Pretty much sums it up for me.

[(o)(o)]

is it just me or is this string of oppressive policy announcements sucking all the joy out of living ? I confess I may have to take a blanket newsbreak soon so as to avoid a period of soul crushing despair overwhelming me. Not sure if i'm over reacting or witnessing the start of something truly awful here. i only know I am feeling progressively more depressed as each day passes.

Spent any time in the Guardian comments section ? You are far from alone.

A divisive cynical schemata has been projected onto the minds of the British people. That's not irreversible.

The majority of human people are progressive deep down they are capable of empathy.

Many Tory voters will turn, when they realise they themselves have been shafted.

It is a really thin majority for Conservatives. They will meet resistance.

Positive News :

TTIP has been scuppered for now.
Cameron faces battles with the House of Lords

[Dio]

It is a really thin majority for Conservatives. They will meet resistance.

That's what was said last time. The idea was that nobody could see the Conservatives doing any better, and if they did even slightly worse they'd be out.